Synthetic supplier invoice approval
A non-operational example for discussing the schema. It labels a fictional training-fixture invoice and does not authorize any payment or represent a real accounts-payable policy.
Synthetic example: This document is for
schema and authoring tests. It is not a policy, authorization, or instruction to perform an
external action.
- Pack ID
https://example.invalid/judgment-packs/supplier-invoice-approval- Pack version
0.1.0- Outcomes
- 4
- Rules
- 3
Guide to this example
Focus: A business approve / manual-review / escalate / reject decision gated on evidence.
The checked-in document is expected to pass JPS carrier, structural, and semantic document checks. The edge and failure notes below are inspection prompts or scratch-copy exercises; they are not evaluation-corpus rows and assert no evaluator-conformance result.
What this example demonstrates
A synthetic accounts-payable pack with applicability, three required evidence items, a cited source, four outcomes, exact-match and compound rules, a suspected-duplicate exception, a manual-review fallback, and explicit escalation.
Good for
- Seeing how required evidence, a variance threshold, and a restricted-supplier check combine into one automatic-approval decision.
- Tracing every outcome, evidence, and source id from its declaration to each local reference.
- Contrasting the automatic approve path with the manual-review, escalate, and reject paths in one document.
Edges to inspect
- Only context=training-fixture is applicable; any other context is outside the example's declared scope.
- A restricted supplier rejects and a variance above the declared tolerance escalates; both outrank the automatic path under the §§7–8 resolution model.
- With all required evidence present, an in-tolerance invoice from a non-restricted supplier follows the automatic approve path.
- A suspected-duplicate flag forces manual review; missing required evidence instead requests the configured handoff.
Failure paths
- In a scratch copy, remove the goods-receipt evidence declaration while keeping a reference to it; the document keeps a valid JSON shape but must fail semantic document conformance.
- Point fallbackOutcome at an undeclared outcome id to produce a dangling-reference semantic failure.
- Approve, escalate, and reject are only display labels; never treat them as authorization to pay, hold, or refuse a real invoice.
Keep the layers separate. A malformed carrier, a
schema-shape failure, and a dangling local reference fail at different document-conformance layers.
Missing evidence, unknown facts, conflicts, and no-match handling belong to the resolution model of
§§7–8, which JPS 0.2.0-draft makes normative for the evaluator conformance class only.
A document-conformance result never depends on them, and the notes on this page are not corpus rows.
Annotated document
The complete validated pack. Each highlighted key links to its definition on the right — click a key to see what it means and its allowed values.
{
"specVersion": "0.2.0-draft",
"id": "https://example.invalid/judgment-packs/supplier-invoice-approval",
"version": "0.1.0",
"title": "Synthetic supplier invoice approval",
"description": "A non-operational example for discussing the schema. It labels a fictional training-fixture invoice and does not authorize any payment or represent a real accounts-payable policy.",
"decision": {
"intent": "Determine whether a fictional supplier invoice may be automatically approved, sent to manual review, escalated, or rejected in a training-fixture context.",
"question": "Should this supplier invoice be approved automatically?"
},
"applicability": {
"op": "fact",
"path": "/invoice/context",
"operator": "equals",
"value": "training-fixture"
},
"evidenceRequirements": [
{
"id": "purchase-order",
"description": "An invented matching purchase order for the fictional invoice.",
"required": true,
"kind": "document"
},
{
"id": "goods-receipt",
"description": "An invented goods receipt confirming the fictional order was received in full.",
"required": true,
"kind": "document"
},
{
"id": "tax-information",
"description": "The required tax information for the fictional supplier and invoice.",
"required": true,
"kind": "fact"
}
],
"sources": [
{
"id": "invoice-policy",
"title": "Fictional supplier invoice approval checklist",
"publisher": "Example Learning Lab",
"publishedAt": "2026-07-01",
"locator": {
"kind": "uri",
"value": "https://example.invalid/checklists/supplier-invoice-approval"
},
"citation": {
"location": "Illustrative approval section",
"excerpt": "An invoice with a matching purchase order, a complete goods receipt, required tax information, and an amount within tolerance may follow the automatic path. Restricted suppliers are rejected."
},
"rights": "Invented content for specification testing; not an operational policy."
}
],
"outcomes": [
{
"id": "approve",
"label": "Approve",
"description": "The invented evidence and declared rules support the automatic path in the fictional scenario."
},
{
"id": "manual-review",
"label": "Manual review",
"description": "An accountable accounts-payable reviewer must decide."
},
{
"id": "escalate",
"label": "Escalate",
"description": "The fictional variance exceeds the declared threshold and needs a person to look at it."
},
{
"id": "reject",
"label": "Reject",
"description": "The fictional supplier is marked restricted."
}
],
"rules": [
{
"id": "restricted-supplier",
"description": "Reject the fictional invoice when its supplier is marked restricted.",
"when": {
"op": "fact",
"path": "/supplier/restricted",
"operator": "equals",
"value": true
},
"outcome": "reject",
"onUnknown": "escalate",
"evidenceRequirementRefs": [
"tax-information"
],
"sourceRefs": [
"invoice-policy"
],
"rationale": "The example checklist rejects invoices from restricted suppliers."
},
{
"id": "variance-over-tolerance",
"description": "Escalate the fictional invoice when its amount variance exceeds the declared tolerance.",
"when": {
"op": "fact",
"path": "/invoice/variancePercent",
"operator": "greater-than",
"value": "2.5"
},
"outcome": "escalate",
"onUnknown": "escalate",
"evidenceRequirementRefs": [
"purchase-order"
],
"sourceRefs": [
"invoice-policy"
],
"rationale": "The example checklist sends variances above the tolerance to a person."
},
{
"id": "standard-invoice",
"description": "Approve a supported fictional invoice within tolerance when all required evidence is present and the supplier is not restricted.",
"when": {
"op": "all",
"conditions": [
{
"op": "fact",
"path": "/invoice/variancePercent",
"operator": "less-than-or-equal",
"value": "2.5"
},
{
"op": "not",
"condition": {
"op": "fact",
"path": "/supplier/restricted",
"operator": "equals",
"value": true
}
},
{
"op": "evidence-present",
"evidenceRequirement": "purchase-order"
},
{
"op": "evidence-present",
"evidenceRequirement": "goods-receipt"
},
{
"op": "evidence-present",
"evidenceRequirement": "tax-information"
}
]
},
"outcome": "approve",
"onUnknown": "escalate",
"evidenceRequirementRefs": [
"purchase-order",
"goods-receipt",
"tax-information"
],
"sourceRefs": [
"invoice-policy"
],
"rationale": "Ordinary supported invoices within tolerance may follow the automatic path."
}
],
"exceptions": [
{
"id": "suspected-duplicate",
"description": "A fictional invoice flagged as a suspected duplicate requires human review.",
"when": {
"op": "fact",
"path": "/invoice/duplicateSuspected",
"operator": "equals",
"value": true
},
"effect": "force-outcome",
"outcome": "manual-review",
"onUnknown": "escalate"
}
],
"fallbackOutcome": "manual-review",
"escalation": {
"triggers": [
"not-applicable",
"missing-required-evidence",
"unknown",
"conflict",
"no-match"
],
"target": {
"kind": "human-role",
"name": "Accounts payable reviewer"
},
"message": "Review only synthetic training inputs: the invoice, the matching purchase order, the goods receipt, tax information, the cited checklist, missing evidence, and conflicting rules; do not release any payment."
},
"metadata": {
"authors": [
"Judgment Pack Specification contributors"
],
"createdAt": "2026-07-22T00:00:00Z",
"license": "Apache-2.0"
}
}